I actually agree with you OP. IT would make it far simpler wouldn't it.

I personally would like this done as I sometimes jump on my Sao Paulo Defiant just for kicks and adding the consoles I need as a sci captain can be troublesome.

I'd also like to see the cloak for these ships be allowed to cloak in battle. It makes sense because they did it throughout the DS9 series.

indeed, and this could be accomplished quite well if they worked out the sensors vs stealth equasion so that a ship with a high sensors skill could take the role of hunting dog and be able to still chase a cloaked ship.

this is an idea i have been arguing for since coming to the forums, why cant a sci/escort by a recon hunter/killer? why cant a tac/cruiser be a siege destroyer? why cant a engie /sci be an aoe wizard?

why cant i take a small ship like a tac escort or bop and dominate in hit & run tactics? or take a bort and take the role of lynch-pin for the group?

all because some dullards want to push a restrictive and broken model...

Cryptic.
Figure out and address the players path of least resistance to reward. this one thing is THE consistent factor undermining all your efforts. be that crafting, raids or starbase projects.

I do not care about the KDF, this is pertaining to the TWO fed ships that have a cloak, with a dumbass cloak console

Quote:

Originally Posted by the1tigglet

I actually agree with you OP. IT would make it far simpler wouldn't it.

I personally would like this done as I sometimes jump on my Sao Paulo Defiant just for kicks and adding the consoles I need as a sci captain can be troublesome.

I'd also like to see the cloak for these ships be allowed to cloak in battle. It makes sense because they did it throughout the DS9 series.

yes this, also I love your sig

Quote:

Originally Posted by skollulfr

indeed, and this could be accomplished quite well if they worked out the sensors vs stealth equasion so that a ship with a high sensors skill could take the role of hunting dog and be able to still chase a cloaked ship.

this is an idea i have been arguing for since coming to the forums, why cant a sci/escort by a recon hunter/killer? why cant a tac/cruiser be a siege destroyer? why cant a engie /sci be an aoe wizard?

why cant i take a small ship like a tac escort or bop and dominate in hit & run tactics? or take a bort and take the role of lynch-pin for the group?

all because some dullards want to push a restrictive and broken model...

I do not care about the KDF, this is pertaining to the TWO fed ships that have a cloak, with a dumbass cloak console

I wanted to make sure that was the case -- if you were willing to give up the console that Cryptic gave in order to give you the choice for a console, bringing the Defiant and Dreadnought to where they were before Cryptic buffed them then your argument may seem less driven based on powering up the ship or ships you play and no others (KDF) which did sacrifice a console slot for their innate cloak.

I wanted to make sure that was the case -- if you were willing to give up the console that Cryptic gave in order to give you the choice for a console, bringing the Defiant and Dreadnought to where they were before Cryptic buffed them then your argument may seem less driven based on powering up the ship or ships you play and no others (KDF) which did sacrifice a console slot for their innate cloak.

well I look at it this way, EVERY KDF ship has a cloak or battle cloak, while only two Federation ships have cloaks, both ships have been severly nerfed not only by the console but other ways since they came out, so yeah, I think they deserve to have SOME advantage

well I look at it this way, EVERY KDF ship has a cloak or battle cloak, while only two Federation ships have cloaks, both ships have been severly nerfed not only by the console but other ways since they came out, so yeah, I think they deserve to have SOME advantage

Nerf implies they were made weaker. The Dreadnought actually got an extra weapon slot added and its phaser lance buffed. Then both ships were given an additional console and the flexibility to use or not use the cloak console in a univeral position -- which in no way can be interpreted as a nerf. The Defiant even got a Fleet version after all that. Can you point to an example where either was functionally made weaker since their original launch?

Nerf implies they were made weaker. The Dreadnought actually got an extra weapon slot added and its phaser lance buffed. Then both ships were given an additional console and the flexibility to use or not use the cloak console in a univeral position -- which in no way can be interpreted as a nerf. The Defiant even got a Fleet version after all that. Can you point to an example where either was functionally made weaker since their original launch?

It's a wonderful ship. It's up to her captain to make it work as intended.

I agree that the Gal-X has not been nerfed. As demonstrated earlier in the thread, across the years, it has been receiving buffs to bring it in line with other ships.

However, from my point of view, the Gal-X is underpowered at this point in time relative to ships with the same Zen cost. For example, for 2500 Zen, a player can purchase one of the thre Odyssey variants, which has 10 console slots - one more than the Gal-X's 9 consoles, which costs the same amount of Zen. This, to me, seems inherently unfair; if the Gal-X cost only 2000 Zen, I would accept this difference, but currently there is little point in paying more Zen for an underperforming ship.

It's a wonderful ship. It's up to her captain to make it work as intended.

It's supposed to be a tactical Cruiser, I've gotten her pretty strong but she feels weak in comparison to other Cruisers and newer ships

Quote:

Originally Posted by starblade7

I agree that the Gal-X has not been nerfed. As demonstrated earlier in the thread, across the years, it has been receiving buffs to bring it in line with other ships.

However, from my point of view, the Gal-X is underpowered at this point in time relative to ships with the same Zen cost. For example, for 2500 Zen, a player can purchase one of the thre Odyssey variants, which has 10 console slots - one more than the Gal-X's 9 consoles, which costs the same amount of Zen. This, to me, seems inherently unfair; if the Gal-X cost only 2000 Zen, I would accept this difference, but currently there is little point in paying more Zen for an underperforming ship.

Part of the point of the Defiant and Gal X having to use a console is so they have to give another console up for the cloaking ability. In the case of the Defiant (especially the Fleet Defiant), this is definitely needed. . .since the KDF counterpart, the raptors, don't turn quite as well (especially the free Qin, which I believe is still borked in turning axis) and have slightly less hullpoints and hull mod, it's a fair tradeoff.

All I'm seeing here is more Federation greed for stuff they're not even supposed to friggin have. Just shush up and work with what you've got.